Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
CSPAN 30
FOXNEWS 17
MSNBC 15
MSNBCW 15
CSPAN2 11
CNN 4
CNNW 4
FBC 4
KQED (PBS) 3
KTVU (FOX) 3
WJLA (ABC) 3
KNTV (NBC) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 148
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 148 (some duplicates have been removed)
, and that is what the house democratic alternative did. we would replace with the -- sequester with deficit reduction achieved over a longer time. >> watch the entire interview sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern and again later at 6:00 p.m. on c- span. now, douglas emmett dorf, director of the congressional budget office. this is just over one hour. >> thank you all for coming. i am the director of the congressional budget office. cbo just released its outlook for the federal budget and the economy over the next decade. i would like to tell you a little about it, and then my colleagues and i will be happy to take your questions. our analysis shows that the united states continues to face very large economic and budget challenges. under current law, we expect the unemployment rate will remain above 7.5% through next year. that would make 2014 the sixth year in a row that unemployment is so high, the longest such period in seven years. -- 70 years. also under current law, we expect budget deficits over the next decade to total about $7 trillion. with deficits so high, the federal debt on the public
the national institutes of health where you are hindering growth you are not delegate t going te deficit. we need more revenue and more cuts. i would like to see that in a big balanced bold proposal. short of that, we must do something to avoid the sequester. >> chris: here is what house speaker boehner said this week. >> at some point, washington, has to deal with its spending problem. i have watched them kick this can down the road for 22 years that i have been here. i have had enough of it. it's time to act. >> chris: congress woman, let's look at the numbers. are you really saying in a government that spends $3.5 trillion a year increased discretionary spending by 14% in the last four years you can't $85 billion to cut to avoid the sequester. >> we have made the cut in terms of agriculture subsidies. there are tens of billions of dollars in cuts there. and that should be balanced with eliminating subsidies for big oil. why should we lower pell grants instead of eliminating the subsidies for big oil? >> chris: why not just cut spending. 85 billion north dakota a $3.5 trillion government.
will make what white house officials are describing as a progressive case for deficit reduction, that that still needs to be done even entitlement reform, and the progressive case is if these programs continue to grow out of control, they crowd out other initiatives, other priorities that are, you know, that progressives hold dear on education, on infrastructure, you know, social programs. >> well, one of the other things we'll see, congressman ellison, you and several other members of the democratic caucus will bring guests into the chamber victims of gun violence. >> that's right. as a matter of fact, young man named semi rahiman, who lost his father in a tragic event in minneapolis will join me and jim langua languagevin and our colleagues, about 30 members who are inviting victims of gun violence to be in the gallery looking forward to them being with us because they -- they're witnesses to the need for sane, sensible reform in the area of gun violence prevention. >> congressman cole, what's your sense of what can get done on that this year? gabby giffords will also be in th
are no going to reduce the deficit. so, what we do need is more revenue, and more cuts, but i would like to see that a big, balanced, bold proposal. and short of that, we must do something to avoid the sequester. >> chris: here's what house speaker boehner said this week: >> at some point washington has to deal with its spending problem. i watched them kick the can down though road for 22 years i have been here and i have had enough of it. >> chris: congresswoman, let's look at this numbers. are you really saying in you a government that spends $3.5 trillion a year, that increased federal discretionary spending by 14%, over the last four years, you can't find 8 8 -- $85 billion to cut, to avoid sequester. >> we have cut agriculture subsidy, tense of billions of dollars in cuts there and that should be balanced with eliminating subsidy for big oil. why should we do -- why should we lower pel grants instead of eliminating the subsidies for big oil. >> chris: why not just cut spending, $85 billion in a $3.5 trillion government. >> let's back up from -- with all due respect to the speaker, what he
" is next. host: the federal deficit is expected to dip below one trillion. the news comes as republicans and democrats face a march 1 deadline to avoid billions in across-the-board spending cuts. the pentagon announced it will offer benefits to same-sex couples. in the senate is wrapping up work on the violence against women act. and the house will vote on a bill requiring the president to offer a plan to balance the federal budget in 10 years. good morning. we begin with your take on the leaked white paper from the white house just fine drone strikes on u.s. citizens overseas. nbc news reported on the memo monday night and it has gotten lots of reaction in washington. what are your thoughts? call -- we want to get your thoughts on social media as well on twitter or facebook. or send us an e-mail. we will get your thoughts in a moment. first, josh gerstein is joining us on the phone. here's your headline -- what was this memo? guest: this is a white paper that looks like it was derived from some confidential legal opinions that the opinions -- opinions that the justice department wrote t
unless congress can agree on a broader deficit reduction package. president obama says if congress fails to agree on such a package as seems likely he wants to delay the cuts to give lawmakers even more time to hand route a deal. >> if congress can't act immediately on a bigger package, if they can't get a bigger package done by the time the sequester is scheduled to go into effect, then i believe that they should at least pass a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reforms that would delay the economically damaging effecting on f the sequester for a few more months until congress finds a way to replace these cuts with a smarter solution. >> on the same day the president spoke, the congressional budget office confirmed what a vast body of empirical evidence has already told us. austerity has been a considerabn economic growth. quote, gdp will grow slowly in 2013 because of fiscal tightening. without that it would probably improve by 1.5%. economic output will remain lower until 2017 making a full decade of lost economic growth from a financial crash. so with the sequester looming we
's pockets but i'm sure it appears and power deficits all over the world. and i don't want to bring up the sisterhood of suffering in this, but certainly stands united and salvation women face a dual burden and the fact they work outside the home, but their work is not considered a contribution to the mainstream economy. certainly pakistan work on the long. so that is why we are putting borel and herbal women at the bottom of the pier made at our development strategies. >> thank you for coming. i want to ask you about the drugs. so pakistan's position is international law under those guidelines a lot to ask, why did she choose them? has pakistan shot drums and if not, the reason i assess this because there's bob pakistan publicly -- >> that may address this is most spokesperson do. they speak to what began in terms of the question and you do ask why -- you ask a question, which is a required complicity in this? let me assure you since we've been in government, there's no question of wink and nod. this is a parliamentary breadline that all government institutions have internalized this
's different? we have seen an enormous increase in the u.s. trade deficit, especially with countries like china. today, they happened to release a report that looked at the effect of currency manipulation, perhaps the single most important factor and explain the growth of our trade deficit. eliminating the trade deficit or eliminating currency manipulation could reduce the trade as a by roughly $190-$490 billion. doing this would increase manufacturing employment by up to 1 million jobs. that's a big downpayments in the whole we have created in manufacturing and employment. one thing we need to do is create demand. that is what we did do but we did not do that in the last decade. we need to shift the demand to domestic produced goods resulting in the hiring of domestic workers. manufacturing jobs are amongst the best for workers especially for those without a college degree. high wages, good benefits. >> bruce, you worked in washington, d.c., and brookings is right off dupont. >> i am mostly on a plane. >> industrial policy is a dirty word. if you go to any other domestic place, it will land yo
, investment in this term, and we all recognize the deficit is an issue but it is an issue over a long term, and the balancing act by repealing sequestration creates for us in this country an opportunity to continue to recover and stabilize our economy, invest in thing wes need for the future, and put on the table revenue that is not there that needs to be part of the revenue generation we need in order to deal with the deficit issues of this country and the investment needed for recovery. thank you very much. >> thank you. i'm so happy to be here with the progressive caucus, talking bat sensible alternative. here are the facts. full implementation of the sequestration would threaten 2.4 million jobs. both in the public and the private sector. the congressional budget office has said that sequestration, if allowed to take effect, would reduce economic growth by 1.25% this year. so, there's no doubt that the sequestration would harm the economy. we need to make sure a sequestration is going to be replaced, it isn't replaced with something even worse. the president has already signed into law
. . it is not broke. our priorities are broken. there is a misplaced obsession with debt and deficits as the national emergency of our time. that has driven the story line inside the beltway. we did a story on how the austerity cost rules washington. it is a portrait of think tanks, philanthropists and others who have framed in a way so it is hard to tell an alternative story. that has shifted a little because of new voices and forces emerging from the 99% or what ever you want to call it. >> you had better have twitter and facebook involved in the project. >> we do, absolutely. we have all kinds of new media. i agree you need to use all of that. it has been a very powerful force. we use all of that at "the nation. " we have a correspondent right about this in a politically. at occupy wall street in new york a few miles from our office, one thing that struck our correspondent was how many young people came to the square and were caught up in conversations, talking to people and the general assembly's, conversations. so many people have lived in front of their laptop or been part of the new media that
a current account deficit for the second straight month. the first time the country has been in the red for several months in a row since officials started keeping track the way they do now. finance ministry officials say the current account deficit for december, $2.8 billion. the trade balance registered a deficit of $6 billion. exports fell 6.9%. imports up .8%. in yen terms over the previous year. the current account surplus for 2012 is the smallest based on comparable data based on 1985. surplus fell 50.8% to $50.2 billion. >>> china's total amount of trade soared 27% from january year earlier. but trade with japan posted much smaller growth. china's customs data shows exports totalled more than 180 billion. up 25%. the country imported 160 billion, showing an increase of 29%. the total amount of trade surged 27%. the jump is attributed mainly to dent in the same month last year. the lunar new year holidays fell in january 2012. >>> trade with japan grew slightly more than 10%. china's trade with asean climbed 43%. the data showed that china's trade with the high-growth region is ex
sequestration and find a balanced approach to deficit reduction that does not include further cuts to discretionary programs. both defense and non-defense programs are equally critical to economic growth and the safety and security of our nation. these discretionary programs are not the reason for our growing debt and yet so far they have been the only place lawmakers have been willing to cut by $1.5 trillion today. non-defense programs alone have been cut a $900 billion bringing spending on these programs to levels not seen since eisenhower was president. as we saw from the white house memo on friday and as you will hear from our panel today, cuts to discretionary programs alone not only won't balance the budget, they will cripple our ability to grow our economy and provide an environment where all americans have the opportunity to lead healthy, safe and productive lives. that is what really brings us together here today because sequestration is about more than numbers on a ledger. there are real people behind these numbers and their lives and livelihoods are on the line. these cu
. >> where did the money go? >> the money supposedly is going to reduce the deficit. but the problem is, the sequestration is indiscriminate. if you let leon panetta do those cuss and figure out where they should come from and did it with a scalpel that would be fine. but i think the defense department can handle this. the president is not going to come up with cuts and programs that he wants if the republicans don't say what they want. whether they want it to be the virgin birth of spending cuts. >> ryan, you and i know that the 95 billion goes back in the private sector. what happens to it then? then it becomes much more lucrative than 85 billion because it's reinvested. where? in private enterprise, correct? >> it doesn't necessarily go back into the private sector. it van issues. >> how does that happen? >> they don't borrow. >> it's not being borrowed. >> but if it's still -- if it's no longer borrowed, and in the private sector where it is functioning under the rules of -- >> sitting in the banks. >> and the program matt sound capitalism. issue three. gop soul search. >> we believ
administration is already more than half wait toward its goal of deficit reduction with the president calling for more tax hikes to finish the job. it. >> over last few years democrats and republicans have come together and cut our deficit by more than two and a half trillion dollars to a balanced mix of spending cuts and higher tax rates for the wealthiest americans. that's more than halfway toward the $4 trillion in deficit reduction that economists and elected officials from both parties say we need to stabilize our debt. i believe we can finish the job to see where we started it, with a balanced mix of more spending cuts and more tax reform. lou: the obama -- obama propaganda machine insists jobs have never fallen below priority number one despite the president's preoccupation with gun control, comprehensive immigration reform. ed henry has our report. >> well president obama only use the word jobs twice in his inaugural address, his team is now building tuesday's big speech as it continues a major push on the economy. >> you will hear the president's state of the union l1 from him for hi
is happening, it is true that the deficits are going to be below a trillion dollars for the first time in several years. it is true that the new revenues and spending that you did not do -- it is also true the economy is beginning to grow again. this is almost like the reverse of what we did in 1993. i was perfectly well aware that a raise taxes and cut spending, it could have been dragging effect on the economy. but not nearly as much as not nearly as much as having low growth or then having interest rates that were too high. so our gamble was that the explosive effect of lowing interest rates with a booming bond market and having more disposal income over five-10 year period to invest in america's future would more than offset putting the hammer down by raising more money and cutting spending. it turned out to be a good gamble. it will make sense here again. but timing is everything. so i think you should have a budget that does not defy arithmetic and does not follow in the trap that we had for 20 of the last 32 years which is you always get more money when you cut taxes. but it is
with some of my republican friends is that we'rewe all want to fix the deficit problem. there is no question. but i think, when they have a chance to look at this bill and understand what we're really facing, i don't think we will have a problem. >> how is this different from the proposal from a year ago? >> did we have a pay freeze a year ago? [laughter] >> it is different. the house had the attrition of the workforce that is in this component. we had a combination -- instead of every three positions that came open. we had two. and a combination of overall across the federal government over a year. this is different here it combines both so we're on the same page. and we have the house proposal on nutrition and we added congressional pay freeze on it. >> what makes you think this time around that the senate majority leader will take up this proposal? >> i would certainly defer to the chairman, but there is a real urgency here. one of the reasons that the president and the administration, during this campaign, didn't want the actual warrant act, the law that requires to notify workers that t
on top of welfare, get our deficit down, get our economy moving, or do anything else. >> today we discover he has not even got a clue about his own policy. his answers remind us of what his party and country are saying about him. the only people he listens to are a small group of rich and powerful people at the top. that is why he has come up with a policy that is unworkable and unfair. he is a prime minister who is weak, incompetent, and totally out of touch. >> that is pathetic scripted rubbish that we get used to every wednesday. on the issue of who listens to hill, i have a very clear idea of who he listens to, because we heard it in a the lse lecture by len mccluskey, who said this -- "i met ed miliband and he asked me this question -- if you had three wishes, three things you would like us to do if we got back into power , what would you like them to be? his answer -- trade union freedom, trade union freedom, trade union freedom. that is who he wants to be the fairy godmother to. >> at the time of the strategic defense and security review two and a half years ago, my friend
that we need higher fuel tax, and we can use that either to reduce the deficit or to pay for something else. it was designed -- or intended -- whether it has done so successfully or not, it was done to pay for infrastructure. >> absolutely. we are not real happy about that. >> john, what are you hoping for next week? >> for some reason, i have not been consulted on that. the president in the campaign said he was 4 and all of the above energy policy, so let's have some announcements that support that -- he was for an " all of the above" energy policy. let's move forward with the things that you need to do to accomplish that policy. i would say that we would also -- i would like to see stop this discussion about taxing the industry and trying to characterize it as subsidies, which is simply not true, and i would like to see more opportunities in terms of where we can open up areas that are off-limits right now. all those combined can generate an enormous amount of opportunity for the economy right when we need it. >> i will just mention a couple of things. i think lenders have been reall
, was hardly mentioned. i think now we've got to talk about the debt, the deficit, getting america's fiscal house in order and create jobs for almost 8% of our population who don't have them. >> congressman, a preview in the retreat, where the democrats are. what's your sense of what the president tonally and substantively? >> i think it will be very optimistic. i hope he talks about the successes of the economy, creating nearly 6 million jobs, discretionary spending the lowest level since 1976 and we have reduced the deficit by half. that we need to do. but he's going to talk about the new initiatives to make the economy work for everybody, investments, growth. >> investments is also spending. therein we immediately see the republican seat. >> when we talk about creating jobs, talking about deficit reduction that the least emphasized method of reducing the deficit, we talk about spending, we talk about revenue, growth, and he wants to emphasize that we need to make investments in infrastructure, in education, in manufacturing, in clean energy and we'll hear about that. >> and the cloud han
to save $45 billion this year. that's 4% of the deficit. we're going to endanger our national defenses and shortchange our servicemen and women overseas for the sake of cutting 4% from this year's deficit? it is totally irresponsible. >> stephanie: wow. deficits don't matter again. >> that's a good point. deficits are this -- you know, this sort of murderous ominous thing that is hanging over the generations and obama doesn't care about the future generations. there are actual cuts. but look, crystal he uses this card all the time. he wrote a column last week saying if democrats don't vote against chuck hagel they're endangering our troops. we want to have some -- cutting that republicans claim we have to do, they're endangering our troops. >> stephanie: all right. hang on, eric remains in the side sidecar. we continue more right-wing world. it is "the stephanie miller show." >> announcer: there's a tea party in her pants and you're invited. call now. 1-800-steph-12. with the know how we need for a new tomorrow. [ male announcer ] make sure america's ready. make sure you're ready.
with smarter spending reductions to bring down the deficit. we can do it in a gradual way so that there is less of an impact. these deductions that certain folks can take advantage of, the average person cannot. not everyone has access to cayman island accounts, the average person does not have access to carry interest income, where they wind up paying a much lower rate on the billions that they earned. we want to make sure that the whole system is fair and transparent and that we are reducing our deficit in a way that does not hamper growth and reduce the kinds of strategies that we need in order to make sure that we are creating a strong middle-class. host: jim from south carolina, on the republican line, good morning. caller: how are you? host: well, thank you. caller: you keep mentioning and hearing people talking about pensions, but pensions are just invested the same way that 401k is. stocks and bonds. people with pensions lost money as well. i heard cases where people were not going to get as much money. if someone is manages their 401k, i do not know, it needs to be managed properly and
are talking about this issue or our deficit issue, to understand the demographic changes that are happening in and around the country. it is also the case -- i know you have been talking about manufacturing. we have a lot of jobs in this country that are unfilled. as a former superintendent of schools, i can tell you that my first priority is that we have to fill those jobs here. we are doing a horrendous job of preparing people for the stem fields that are required to make sure this country actually leads the world in advanced manufacturing. there is so much more we can do. we have not begun to do what we need to do for kids in this country to be ready for the 21st century. while we do that, it seems to me that it makes no sense for us to be saying to people that have acquired advanced degrees here and our foreign nationals, whose education we subsidized, but for a answer, because of obsolete caps that do not make sense, if that that ought to go build a business to compete with people in the united states. we need those folks here, to be able to drive innovation here. >> senator rubio is g
of americans want sensible policies for this country. they want to us deal with the deficit in a way that provides for the future of this country. so they want to invest in research and education. they want roads and bridges. we're having a tough time breaking through the division that we have in washington. and quite frankly, the more you can do to underscore the importance of the work that you do, i think the stronger the voice will be for a reasonable solution to our fiscal problems that will permit n.i.h. to get the funding it needs on a permanent basis. so i think this point needs to be underscored more and more. the work you do here and the impact it has on our lives. i was talking -- we had a chance to talk about the work being done in infection diseases about trying to develop a way in which we can get a flu shot that is more generic rather than every year. that's extremely exciting to me. i don't like trying to figure out when i'm going to get my flu shot and whether it works or not. the more we talk about what we can achieve in the future, what america can achieve in the fu
with a record debt and deficit, threat of global warming, threat of global poverty, of pandemics, of national security challenges like continuing war on terrorism, the instability of iran and north korea, rising powers, turmoil across the middle east, turmoil in north africa, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the growing threat of cyberattacks. how we confront these problems, how we deal with these challenges will in many ways determine that future course of america. it will determine whether the united states will be a leader in the 21st century or whether we will be just another failed empire in history. to succeed we will depend on the resilience of our economy, the strength of our diplomatic and military institutions and above all, the effectiveness of our political system that underpins in many ways what we do as a country. and that brings me to what i see as perhaps the most urgent task facing this nation and facing all of us and that is overcoming the partisan dysfunction in congress that poses a threat to our quality of life, to our national security, to our economy
. do you believe that the tax and deficit debate is harmful to the business environment now? >> the uncertainty is back. the amount of -- the uncertainty is bad. you go from the fiscal cliff to the deficit debate to sequestration. that is inherently disruptive to business investment. certainty is a good multiplier. we are these long cycle businesses that have global competition. i do not have the lecture he to say that i will quit investing for six months until this is resolved. i will keep going. the people who can hurt the worst by all of this are the small and medium businesses. the people that have no buffer. that get confused. these are the people that are the heart of the u.s. economy. they are the ones that are constantly being bombarded as we go from one to another. this can only be solved here. this is one of the few cases where the business roundtable of people speak with one voice. it would be great to get a resolution. >> there is a divide in the corporate side on the corporate tax front. large companies would benefit more from corporate tax reform, especially go
to say we have a spending problem. we have a budget deficit problem we have to address. >> now pelosi went on to claim that nothing brings more money in the u.s. treasury than investing in education. investing another word for spending. bret? >> bret: so, ed, what are we hearing if the president will tack the deficit in the speech? >> interesting, because today jay carney said he does believe there is a spending problem in washington. he seems to disagree with nancy pelosi a little bit. carney went on to say he believes the problem is with spending on healthcare. so something the president tried to tack with the affordable care act and carney went on to say the president doesn't believe the government is too big now. when you compare it to historic levels, sign he is not going all in on the deficit tomorrow night. he is going all in on new investments. >> bret: okay. ed henry live on the north lawn. thank you. you can see the president's speech along with the republican response on fox news channel tuesday starting at 8:55:00 p.m. eastern. and to share your thoughts and opinions on tu
of where we stand and where we're going. the 2013 deficit standing at $845 billion. last year it was $1.1 trillion. so obviously we're going in the right direction. but they do give a grim fast if there is a type of austerity measure that is in place while the economy remains very fragile. >> well, that's right. there are two things we have to work on at the same time. the most important thing is to make sure that we continue to see an economic recovery, that we do what we can to accelerate that recovery, put more people back to work. and the sequester would undercut that effort, because if you take that much money out of the economy very rapidly in this across-the-board way, it will result in lost jobs, which is why we proposed this alternative. now over the longer term, there's no doubt we have to reduce our deficit, but we have to do it in a smart and balanced way as the president has said, and that's why we have proposed a combination of cuts and we've already done $1.5 trillion in cuts as part of the budget control act and other action. we did some revenue as part of the most recen
've tried and tried and passed two measures to try to replace the sequester to go about managing the deficit whittling down the entitlement programs so we can save them. instead here we are again and the president says no, we've got to raise taxes. and the same strategy vilify the rich and i suppose don't raise the taxes on the rich and people are happy to do that and that the republicans want to cut programs that try, why would anyone who is in these programs or thinks he might have this program why would that ever be appealing to go the republican way. >> and first of all, we understand that the president is not led on this issue and there's no response whatsoever, and just raising taxes and to say that you can tax the rich and get rid of the problem it's fictional. and i believe we're for fiscal discipline, managing down the debt and deficit for a reason because we don't want a debt crisis to implode this country and our economy because if you see interest rates jack up because all of a sudden our debt is unsustainable. that means families will have to pay more every month in their mortga
lost is there are different ways of reducing the deficit. the president talks about the debt reduction deals we have. if you look at the spending side it is all discretionary. all on the defense side. it is research and work development, all of these things that are r&d. they do not deal with what most economists would say is the real problem. has a debate somehow skewed in how we have failed to make these distinctions and where to make the cut? >> this notion of federal government driving innovation versus private and filling a shift there. >> there's always both. the government has been the catalyst of the private sector involved. if you go back 30 years, most would come from the department of defense. today there's a lot more in the private sector than ever before. it is quite strong. >> there is not one company, ge is not alone, that has not changed their health care a pension plan. they are difficult decisions that are hard to do. we do it in a constructive way with employees. the notion that we are in a world where we cannot do anything about some of these big entitlement costs,
the deficit. all by honoring the wish of 2/3 of americans to respect states' rights for marijuana just like we do for alcohol. i would invite my colleagues to join this effort in developing a marijuana policy that makes sense for america today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. coble, for five minutes. mr. coble: i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, january is the traditional month in which new year's resolutions are developed. i'm suggesting that president obama and mrs. boim adopt a resolution -- mrs. obama adopt a resolution. it appears to me, mr. speaker, regard air force one very casually and i believe on some occasions two planes, at least two planes go to the same destination. air force one, mr. speaker, belongs to president and mrs. obama. but air force one also belongs to the american taxpayer. and i would welcome a new year's resolution that would provide generous lace of all future air force one dispatches with prudence, discipline and last but certainly not least fiscal austerity. america's taxpayers will be
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 148 (some duplicates have been removed)